論公平正義作為國際投資條約的價值取向

Equity and Justice as the Value-proemtation of International Investment Rreaty

公平正義是法律尤其是國際法的基本價值取向，國際法中的公平正義應該包括四項原則：經濟主權原則、平等自由原則、公平互利原則和有約必守原則。因此，有必要以公平正義為價值取向，針對當代BIT的種種弊端和不足進行變革。就2012年簽署的中另BIT而言，筆者持有與哈頓教授不同的看法：中加BIT談判雙方在地位上是平等自由的；從內容上看，中加BIT相對比較公平；從總體上看，它較好地平衡了東道國和投資者的權利和義務。特別值得贊賞的是，它體現了公平正義中的差別原則，對中國和加拿大各自的特殊情況給予公平的特殊考慮和安排。但是，中加BIT對最惠國待遇適用於「公平公平待遇」的規定，有可能是加方有意陷中國於不利，這是不公平不正義的。加方明知這一點，卻不提醒中方，其後果是，加拿大投資者在中國投資，可以援引中加BIT中的最惠國待遇條款適用中國在1994年1月1日之後生效其他BIT中籠統含糊的公平公平待遇條款，從而挑戰中國的某些重大的內政措施。有了中加BIT的談判經驗和教訓，今後中國在與美國和歐盟談判BIT時，應當以國家經濟主權為最高圭臬，既要堅持平等自由原則和權利義務平衡原則，又要堅持差別原則，考慮中國的特殊國情和要求，同時要特別小心避免中加BIT中最惠國待遇條款那樣的陷阱。Equity and Justice is the fundamental value-orientation of law, and intermational law, in particular. It consists of four principles including economic soverignty, equality and freedom, equitable and mutual benefits, and pacta sunt seranda. Terefore, it is necessary to conduct reform to adjust the deficiencies in current international investment treaties on the bases of equity and justice. As far as China-Canada BIT is concerned, the auithor has some different views from that of Dr. Harten as follows: the two parties negotiated the BIT on equality and freedom, the contents are comparatibely fair, and the rights and obligations of the host state and inverstor are generally well balanced. It is worth mentioning that the China-Canada BIT reflects the differentiated rule of justice that it addresses the particulars of both china and Canada and makes corresponding arrangements However, the application of most-favored-nation treatment to fair and equitabel treatment could be unfair and injustice to China. Canada knew it well in advance but did not remind China. The consequence is that Canadian investors can invoke the MFN clause to apply the fair and equitable treatment clause in China's BIT concluded since January 1 1994 to challenge China's measures. With the experience and lessons learned from the China-Canada BIT, when China negotiates BITs with the USA and EU, China should insist on principles of economic sovereignty, equality and freedom, and the balance of rights and obligations; and on the other hand, China should use the differentiated rule to address its special concerns and tries to avoid the loophole of MFN in the China-Canada BIT.